Uh, this question was asked at another forum. My answer is that the child has to go back to the biological mother.
There hae been a number of cases like this in the past. The kidnapper is always the other parent, often one who lost the custodial battle in court but sometimes one who jujst decides that he or she doesn't want to stay married and takes the fastest way out, i.e., leaves the country. The fact that the kid was given up for adoption proves that the person was unfit for parenting and if he or she was not given custody that the court made the correct decision. It shows that there was no love for the child involved and that removing the child from the other parent was nothing more than criminal kidnapping motivated by spite. If the courts of the country the child was removed to doesn't return it to the biological parent then it also will not extradite the kidnapper back to the original country. How can it do so after ruling that the adoptive parents were the rightful parents? You might as well legalize human trafficking.

"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work...After eight years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!" — Henry Morgenthau, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury secretary, 1941.

A Liberty couple, Timothy and Jennifer Monahan, will not be forced to return a Guatemalan girl they adopted to her birth parents although the child was allegedly abducted from her birth mother’s side in 2006 by what was believed to be a child-trafficking ring.

According to Victoria Nuland, a spokeswoman for the U.S. State Department,

Guatemalan officials had been informed that the Monahans would not be forced to return the child because the two countries had not signed the Hague Convention on Abduction. The treaty was signed Jan. 1, 2008, more than a year after the initial abduction took place but before the girl left the country bound for the United States.

Nuland said at a press briefing May 15 in Washington, D.C., that the United States was deeply concerned about allegations regarding stolen children and inter-country adoptions.

“Our primary goal in any kind of inter-country adoption is that they be ethical, that they be transparent,” Nuland said via an email link. “That’s why we push so many countries to join the Hague Convention on Adoptions.

“That said, we can’t accept cases under the Hague Convention on Abduction if the treaty was not in force at the time of the alleged wrongful removal or retention.”

Nuland said the proper venue for pursuing the case would be in state courts.

“They’re the competent organ for holding a full hearing on the merits and the best interests of the child,” Nuland said.

The child, Anyeli Hernandez Rodriguez who was born Oct. 1, 2004, was reportedly abducted on Nov. 3, 2006, when she was 2 years old, and whisked away in a taxi cab as her mother was opening the door to their home in San Miguel Petapa.

Last year a Guatemalan judge ruled in favor of the birth parents, Loyda Rodriguez and her husband Dayner Orlando Hernandez, and ordered the child be returned to them and her passport canceled.

The girl, now 7, spent time in an orphanage while her birth parents searched for her with the assistance of Survivors’ Foundation, a human rights organization. The child left Guatemala on Dec. 9, 2008, as Karen Abigail Monahan VanHorn. Jennifer Monahan’s maiden name is VanHorn. There have been no allegations made that the Monahans knew the child they adopted had been kidnapped.

When contacted last year by the Liberty Tribune after the story broke, the Monahans declined to comment and posted a note on the door of their upscale house on Woodbury Lane saying, “Please respect our privacy and do not trespass on our private property. Thank you.”

They also hired the Peter Mirijanian public relations agency to represent them. The agency could not be reached for comment, but earlier had released this statement: “The Monahan family will continue to advocate for the safety and best interests of their legally adopted child. They remain committed to protecting their daughter from additional trauma as they pursue the truth of her past through appropriate legal channels.”

Neighbors said the Monahans have three children, two of them adopted. Timothy Monahan is an orthopedic surgeon with offices in Liberty and staff privileges at Liberty Hospital.

Liberty Editor Angie Anaya Borgedalen can be reached at 389-6636 or [email protected].

"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work...After eight years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!" — Henry Morgenthau, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury secretary, 1941.

"Our scientific power has out run out spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men." - Martin Luther King Jr.
"A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself." - Joseph Pulitzer

It seems kinder to the child to leave him/her with the parents and other family he/she grew up with rather than hand him/her over to a stranger, though of course the parent/s should be allowed to be a part in the child's life.

The court ruled that the treaty didn't apply because the kidnapping ocurred before the treaty was signed, but the chid was brought to the United States after the date the treaty was signed. I would think the relevant date would be the day on which the local crime became an international one, i.e., when the child was removed from her native country.

It seems kinder to the child to leave him/her with the parents and other family he/she grew up with rather than hand him/her over to a stranger, though of course the parent/s should be allowed to be a part in the child's life.

Yes. I don't really understand why the welfare of the child doesn't take priority for so many people.

"South Africa is a shithole. It used to be a decent place." -Ben Kenobi, sharing his wisdom on world history

the kid thinks the adoptive parents are the real parents, giving it back to the biological parents would be cruel, I agree with what Elok said, the child will have 4 parents from now on, and decide on what do with his life as a teenager

the kid thinks the adoptive parents are the real parents, giving it back to the biological parents would be cruel, I agree with what Elok said, the child will have 4 parents from now on, and decide on what do with his life as a teenager

Does she think the adoptive parents are her real parents? I think the trend these days iis to tell a kid that she's aodpted at some point. Also I beleive that she was around 3 or 4 at the time of her adoption. She may not remember her adoption, but she may remember living in the orphanage.

While she may know that she is not the biological child of her parents (it may be obvious, depending on their respective ethnicities), she's been with them and their family for five years, while she is unlikely to remember more than tiny traces of her birth mother. Returning her means uprooting her from her entire life as she knows it; it's quite likely she'll come to regard her birth mother as "that woman who took me away from my family," IMO. No matter how kind she is, that's how it's going to seem, especially if she's going away to a whole other country. This seems like it would create not one but two broken families.

She has siblings in Guatemala. She should be with them and her parents. Also, the adoption agencies responsible should be closed down and charged. Someone should have been responsible for due diligence.

There's nothing wrong with the dream, my friend, the problem lies with the dreamer.

While she may know that she is not the biological child of her parents (it may be obvious, depending on their respective ethnicities), she's been with them and their family for five years, while she is unlikely to remember more than tiny traces of her birth mother. Returning her means uprooting her from her entire life as she knows it; it's quite likely she'll come to regard her birth mother as "that woman who took me away from my family," IMO. No matter how kind she is, that's how it's going to seem, especially if she's going away to a whole other country. This seems like it would create not one but two broken families.

I agree.
The child has been with his adptive parents for years, it regards the children of his new family as his own siblings, has made friends in the new country and speaks its language fluently, while probably not being able to communicate with the inhabitants of the country in which his biological parents reside.
It would be rather cruel to the child at this age if it is suddenly taken out of his normal surroundings and put into a foreign country with a family it doesn´t know.

As part of your equipment, you are to have a trowel, and when you squat outside, you are to scrape a hole with it and then turn and cover your excrement.
Deut. 23: 13

the kid thinks the adoptive parents are the real parents, giving it back to the biological parents would be cruel, I agree with what Elok said, the child will have 4 parents from now on, and decide on what do with his life as a teenager

I'm pretty sure the kid looks in the mirror and knows his adoptive parents aren't his real parents even if they think of them as their defacto parents. Still, the real parents are the ones who suffered a kidnapping, the adoption therefor was never legal, and the kid should go back to it's real parents.

"Our scientific power has out run out spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men." - Martin Luther King Jr.
"A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself." - Joseph Pulitzer

She has siblings in Guatemala. She should be with them and her parents. Also, the adoption agencies responsible should be closed down and charged. Someone should have been responsible for due diligence.

IIRC nine people are charged, including a judge. I'll see if I can find more.

"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work...After eight years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!" — Henry Morgenthau, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury secretary, 1941.

The answer can't really be anything other than the mother, as long as she's fit to take care of the child.

Agreed. Any thing else just compounds the crime and makes it worse. She must get her child back which was stolen from her.

"Our scientific power has out run out spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men." - Martin Luther King Jr.
"A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself." - Joseph Pulitzer

Children are not consider to be competent to make adult decisions especially on legal matters. Yes, an advocate/representative for the child must and should be appointed to make sure the child's interests are upheld but that doesn't mean a child is the same as an adult. Also children tend to want what they know even though they are unable to understand complex concepts such as legality. Someone has said that the child no longer speaks Spanish and that this would cause an undo hardship but a young child can adapt and she would have had Spanish language skills had this horrible crime not been committed.

Lastly, some judges, especially (IMHO) American judges from rural areas are filled with nationalist or even racist beliefs feeling that central America must be horrible there for the child is better off in America. Such paternalistic beliefs must be avoided. The child, even if they live a poor life, is better off with their real family as long as their real family is not abusive which no one has claimed is the case. The adoption is clearly not legal so if the adoptive parents did not adopt her then certainly she belongs with her real parents.

"Our scientific power has out run out spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men." - Martin Luther King Jr.
"A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself." - Joseph Pulitzer

You realize, I hope, that we're talking about a human child, and not, say, a collector's-edition He-Man lunchbox? Nobody has (or should have, anyway) ownership rights on a human being. As a parent, I do not own my child; I am merely responsible for bringing him up and teaching him what he needs to know to survive as an adult. Which is not to say that I should have no rights at all, but the important thing is that that job gets done, and it gets done right.

Children are not consider to be competent to make adult decisions especially on legal matters. Yes, an advocate/representative for the child must and should be appointed to make sure the child's interests are upheld but that doesn't mean a child is the same as an adult. Also children tend to want what they know even though they are unable to understand complex concepts such as legality. Someone has said that the child no longer speaks Spanish and that this would cause an undo hardship but a young child can adapt and she would have had Spanish language skills had this horrible crime not been committed.

Lastly, some judges, especially (IMHO) American judges from rural areas are filled with nationalist or even racist beliefs feeling that central America must be horrible there for the child is better off in America. Such paternalistic beliefs must be avoided. The child, even if they live a poor life, is better off with their real family as long as their real family is not abusive which no one has claimed is the case. The adoption is clearly not legal so if the adoptive parents did not adopt her then certainly she belongs with her real parents.

You've already demonstrated a relative lack of interest in the welfare of the child when you asserted that this should be decided on the basis of some system of desert.

By the way, maybe you should lay off the prejudice against rural people.

"South Africa is a shithole. It used to be a decent place." -Ben Kenobi, sharing his wisdom on world history